HMS Hood Inaccuracy...why did i even bother?

[Halrian187]

The HMS Hood is Very Inaccurate in one aspect....It doesn't have torpedo tubes.... But it did in real life.   Why did i even bother picking it up then?  

[crzyhawk]

The torpedo tubes were fixed, this was a known fact that in game she wasnt fitted with tubes.

[Battlecruiser_Siegfried]

The HMS Hood is Very Inaccurate in one aspect....It doesn't have torpedo tubes.... But it did in real life.   Why did i even bother picking it up then?  

 

Fun fact: the majority of battleships in WoWs mounted torps of one sort or another, in their hulls. Hood is no different. However, outside Mutsu, hull-mounted torpedoes have not been implemented, and there is no indication that they will ever become the norm. Honestly, considering how ridiculously situational Mutsu's torps are, and that WG would have had to take something away from the Hood we received in order to grant them to you (shorter range, less resilient hull, no personal AA sledgehammer), I think you should feel lucky they aren't there.

[Bronco]

The Hood was previewed extensively therefore this shouldn't be a surprise!

[SeanPwnery]

The HMS Hood is Very Inaccurate in one aspect....It doesn't have torpedo tubes.... But it did in real life.   Why did i even bother picking it up then?  

 

Go watch the Mighty Jingles video on the hood, then you'll understand about the torpedo tubes.

 

[awiggin]

The HMS Hood is Very Inaccurate in one aspect....It doesn't have torpedo tubes.... But it did in real life.   Why did i even bother picking it up then?  

 

Because you didn't bother to read or ask questions before buying?

[MajorRenegade]

And here is someone that didn't do his research before buying.

[paradat]

The torpedo tubes were fixed, this was a known fact that in game she wasnt fitted with tubes.

 

​They were also horrible. Nothing else in the game would even come close to how bad they were.

[Halrian187]

 

Because you didn't bother to read or ask questions before buying?

 

I have never inncounter such an inacurracy in WoWs before with premium ships there for i didnt...And i should have asked around...

[Ariokk]

Maybe because you like the overall history of the ship and wanted to use it in a game that you enjoy playing? I swear. If they included EVERY piece of a ship, completely to scale and designed to the detail, someone would complain that the ship was just a shade too dark on the gray or that the rust near the stern 5 feet above the starboard propeller is a wee bit too orangey. Be happy with a game that looks good, has ships that are interesting to play and are for the most part historically accurate. Either that or maybe some really good meds will include in your mind whatever is missing visually from the game.

[dangergranger]

had 3 games in her and to me she is very fun ship . I know her dispersion can be hair pulling but any bb can do that to you . just take a break from her and let the hype settle down some and try her again

[kerensky914]

 

I have never inncounter such an inacurracy in WoWs before with premium ships there for i didnt...And i should have asked around...

 

An 'inaccuracy' that is present in all USN BBs and most other pre-WWII BBs in-game.  WG doesn't use fixed torpedo tubes.  Mutsu got hers because they are aimable¹ and therefore work with the torpedo systems in-game.  Also, Hood's underwater tubes were removed, and the above-water ones were supposed to have been removed in her delayed refit, which she never got.

 

¹Yeah, I know the arcs suck, but they are still there.

[Phoenix_jz]

 

I have never inncounter such an inacurracy in WoWs before with premium ships there for i didnt...And i should have asked around...

 

Because fixed torpedo tubes are no modelled in game. In fact, most Battleships had theirs removed during modernization.

[m373x]

Why did i even bother picking it up then?  

 

Because you are driven by impulse and don't research things.

[Jiggiwatt]

Historical equipment aside, why would you want 5km torpedoes in a ship with a 910m turning radius, a length of 260m and poor secondaries? 

[Halrian187]

I will take a moment to say that 5 games in now and She is alot more fun then i first expected.  I still want my torps. but ill live.

[DoomStomper]

IMHO fixed or not, the above-water (thus conventionally vulnerable) placement of Hood's torps should've justified their inclusion.

 

The bathtub boats from the 2016 April Fool's event demonstrated that the game engine is perfectly capable of allowing torps to be aimed via gyro from fixed mounts.  It seems like the only reason WG chose not to include them was fear that they would run contrary to Hood's "intended playstyle".

 

I fully intend to purchase Hood.  Still, I would've happily done without the ludicrously buffed traverse speed and special AP characteristics (that aren't even made apparent in the port stats) if it meant she could have a couple Campbeltown-level torps per side.  They would be extremely situational, probably with firing angles similar to Mutsu (or worse), but I don't care.

 

I have zero complaints about prioritizing balance over historical accuracy.  What's irritating is when balance seems to take a backseat to 'flavor', while any sense of realism gets discarded entirely.  Others may not agree, but I find it infinitely more satisfying to play a weaker ship that feels like a balanced reflection of its actual capabilities, as opposed to a powerful one that feels more like it was shoehorned into filling a contrived niche.